Perhaps the most surprising pro-grouse shooting voice at Monday’s Westminster Hall debate on driven grouse shooting was Sam Rushworth, the Labour MP for Bishop Auckland.
Wild Justice described Rushworth’s arguments in the debate as being ‘less coherent’ than his Labour colleague’s (Olivia Blake MP):
‘Mr Rushworth’s arguments were less coherent, stating firmly his dedication to animal welfare and his stance against fox hunting, whilst also defending an industry known for its illegal persecution of birds of prey and its legal, yet unethical, killing of wildlife such as the routine killing of foxes, referred to by the industry as ‘vermin’‘.
Here’s what I wrote earlier today about Rushworth’s contribution to the debate:
‘Sam Rushworth MP (Labour, Bishop Auckland), whose constituency includes some notorious grouse moors in the North Pennines, which is another well-known raptor persecution hotspot, spoke about attending a recent ‘Lets Learn Moor’ event with primary-age schoolchildren. He also mentioned being “disgusted by the criminality that sometimes occurs on the moorland“. I wonder if he realises that these events, funded by BASC, are facilitated by the Regional Moorland Groups, many of whose members have been under police investigation into suspected and confirmed raptor persecution crimes? Awkward’.
It was all a bit odd.
But now things have become a whole lot clearer.
Here’s an excerpt from Rushworth’s list of Registered Interests on the Parliamentary website:
Well, well, well. Rushworth’s pro-shooting stance no longer looks surprising, does it?
This entry reveals that Rushworth received a £10,000 donation from the North Pennine Moorland Group in October 2023, for ‘campaign support’. Imagine that!
For those who might not know who the North Pennine Moorland Group is, it’s basically one of a large number of regional grouse moor groups that sprang up across England and Scotland several years ago, presenting themselves as ‘grassroots community groups’, purporting to represent ‘downtrodden country folk’ who were being unfairly attacked by some nasty people from the cities who didn’t understand country ways.
In reality, these groups appear to be part of a well-funded and co-ordinated astroturfing campaign for the driven grouse shooting industry, closely associated with the vile and abusive Campaign for the Protection of Moorland Communities (C4PMC) website, which specialises in publishing personal attacks and smears on anyone who dares to raise questions about the environmental unsustainability and criminality associated with driven grouse moor management. Indeed, the Chair of the North Pennines Moorland Group was listed as being one of ‘Our People’ when C4PMC lurched on to the scene in 2020 (see here).
Funny, I don’t recall hearing Rushworth making a declaration of interest about this £10,000 donation prior to his speech in the debate. As I understand it, ‘politicians must declare relevant interests that could be perceived as influencing their views or actions. This includes financial interests, gifts, hospitality, and any other interests that might create a perception of bias‘.
Perhaps, as this £10,000 donation was received in October 2023, prior to Rushworth’s election in July 2024, it doesn’t count as something he needed to declare before his speech? But then the donation is included on his official Registered Interests page on the parliamentary website so it does appear to be something he should have declared in the debate. Perhaps it was just an oversight and he’ll no doubt be grateful for the clarification here.
The donation raises a lot of questions.
The timing of it is interesting, as it was made around the same time as a £10,000 donation was made to the then Conservative MP for Hexham, Northumberland, Guy Opperman, by a company called GMS Partnership Ltd, whose sole director just happened to be one Andrew Gilruth, the Chief Executive of the Moorland Association, the lobby group for England’s grouse moor owners (see here) and prior to that he was Chair of the Regional Moorland Groups.
Opperman lost his seat in the July 2024 election.
Were these two £10,000 donations linked in any way? Are we uncovering a wider strategy of ‘donations’ from the grouse shooting industry, given to MPs in grouse moor dominated constituencies? I don’t know, I’m just speculating, but I think it’d be worth investigating the Registered Interests of other MPs in northern England, just to see if there’s a pattern.
It also raises the question of who is funding the regional moorland groups? Or are we supposed to believe that the gamekeepers in the North Pennines Moorland Group have been saving up their tips in a jam jar to then happily hand them over to support a prospective MP’s election campaign?
There have been rumours circulating for several months about who might be the actual financial backer(s) of these moorland groups, and I also have my own suspicions, but a bit more work is needed to be certain.
Meanwhile, if any of Rushworth’s constituents reading this are minded to make a formal complaint to the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority about Rushworth’s failure to declare an interest during the driven grouse shooting debate (alleged breach of Code D (6) of the House of Commons Code of Conduct for Members of Parliament), you can find out how to do it here.
Many thanks to the blog reader who provided the tip off.
The debate on banning driven grouse shooting took place at Westminster Hall on Monday 30 June 2025, as a result of Wild Justice’s petition passing 100,000 signatures.
Wild Justice shared its views on the debate in its newsletter this morning, as follows:
On Monday afternoon, and in a 34-degree heatwave, Wild Justice headed to the Houses of Parliament to watch our petition be debated by backbenchers in Westminster Hall. This is the third time in nine years that a petition on this subject has met the criteria for a debate (100,000 signatures) but the first time under a Labour government. A massive thank you to everyone who helped it past the threshold (again).
Following Labour’s woeful response to our petition when it reached 10,000 signatures – in which they stated, ‘The Government has no plans to ban driven grouse shooting’ (see our blog here) – we didn’t have high hopes for a particularly reasoned or informed debate.
Only two Labour MPs turned up to contribute on Monday – the brilliant Olivia Blake MP (Sheffield Hallam), and Sam Rushworth MP (Bishop Auckland). [Ed: actually there was a third Labour MP, Joe Morris from the Hexham constituency, who didn’t make a speech but did make one intervention to ask about introducing vicarious liability for landowners as in Scotland].
As usual, Olivia – whose constituency yielded the highest number of signatures on our petition, and whose residents have to live alongside the polluting smoke and flooding caused by driven grouse moors – was brilliant. As the standalone backer of our petition in the debate, she clearly and firmly articulated her support, highlighting the subjects of air pollution, environmental degradation and criminal activity.
An amusingly dry comment was her suggestion to those employed, often on very low wages, by the industry charging up to £7,000 for a day’s grouse shooting; “If I were a beater, I might be unionising to take more of that profit home to my family.”
Mr Rushworth’s arguments were less coherent, stating firmly his dedication to animal welfare and his stance against fox hunting, whilst also defending an industry known for its illegal persecution of birds of prey and its legal, yet unethical, killing of wildlife such as the routine killing of foxes, referred to by the industry as ‘vermin’.
Why did so few Labour MPs – and not a single Green MP – turn up to the debate? Is this subject deemed by them to be in the ‘too difficult’ category? Are Labour perhaps wary of upsetting other ‘countryside’ groups after the reprisals over their unpopular ‘family farm tax’ proposals? Or do they simply not care about the widespread criminality and environmental damage associated with driven grouse shooting?
We know lots of you contacted your MPs over the last few weeks and asked them to attend the debate on Monday – so they can’t argue that they were unaware of the issues or of the debate. It would be interesting to hear how they account for their absence if any of you decide to challenge them on it.
Ban Driven Grouse Shooting – a game of BINGO
Although there was an almost empty house to defend our petition, we did enjoy a full house of grouse shooting BINGO. When challenged on its bad practices and poor track record, the driven grouse shooting industry has a few well-rehearsed and worn-out lines it peddles on repeat. Watching the debate on Monday we enjoyed crossing off the usual list of cliches, tropes and outright lies.
Some of our highlights included:
Claims that the driven grouse shooting industry has a ‘zero tolerance for raptor persecution’. Last week the RSPB published new figures which showed 102 Hen Harriers have been confirmed or are suspected to have been illegally killed between 2020 – 2024, mostly from areas managed for driven grouse shooting in northern England.
By the way, Greg Smith MP gets the star bonus prize for the most absurd statement which made us laugh out loud during the debate: ‘Gamekeepers are not the enemy of the hen harrier; they are its strongest ally in the uplands’. Mr Smith (a self-declared member of the Countryside Alliance & BASC) can look forward to a fruitful career on the panto circuit when his parliamentary career is over.
‘The UK has 75% of the world’s heather moorland, which is ‘rarer than rainforest’’. Upland heather moorland is an artificial, man-made habitat created by management techniques including burning vegetation on vast areas of peatland, causing air pollution and increasing carbon emissions. The ‘75%’ myth is also totally inaccurate and was debunked six years ago in this excellent blog by Professor Steve Carver of Leeds University.
‘Managed grouse moorland also provides a defence against tick-borne diseases’. This desperate claim came from Shadow Defra Minister Robbie Moore MP, and its irony wasn’t lost on us. A recent scientific study suggests that ticks found in woodlands where lots of Pheasants are released are two and a half times more likely to carry Lyme disease bacteria than ticks found in woodlands where no Pheasants are released (see here). Perhaps the ‘guardians of the countryside’ should consider stopping the annual release of 50 million non-native Pheasants if they’re so concerned about the prevalence of tick-borne diseases.
Daniel Zeichner, Defra Minister for Food Security and Rural Affairs, rounded off the ‘debate’ by providing the Government’s position on our petition. He repeated Labour’s earlier stance about having no plans to ban driven grouse shooting but this time adding, “we keep options under close review”. Not close enough, obviously.
He did acknowledge the cast-iron link between driven grouse shooting and the illegal persecution of birds of prey but then feebly muttered, “There are strong penalties in place for offences committed against birds of prey and other wildlife, and anyone found guilty of such offences should feel the full force of the law. Penalties can include an unlimited fine and/or a six-month custodial sentence” (emphasis is ours).
These statements are routinely trotted out by Defra in an attempt to gaslight the public into thinking there’s no need to worry about illegal raptor persecution because measures are in place to tackle it. The very reason that raptor persecution continues on driven grouse moors is because the criminals there know that (a) there is only a miniscule chance of being caught, and (b) even if they are caught, the punishment is of little consequence. The one, and only, custodial sentence ever given to a gamekeeper for committing raptor persecution offences was a case in Scotland in 2014, when a gamekeeper was filmed by the RSPB trapping a Goshawk and clubbing it to death with a stick, amongst other offences. He was given a four-month custodial sentence. Every other gamekeeper convicted since then has received either a small fine (probably covered by his employer) and/or a short community service order.
There’s no effective deterrent and Labour’s trite regurgitation of the words ‘should’ and ‘can’ demonstrates its appalling unwillingness to stop this brazen criminality. That is unforgiveable.
There was one spark of credibility in the Minister’s closing speech, and that was his referral to the Government’s recent public consultation on proposals to extend the Heather and Grass etc. Burning (England) Regulations 2021, including a change to the definition of deep peat from 40cm depth to 30cm depth, which would effectively ban the burning of heather on many driven grouse moors across northern England. It was evident from the speeches made by the Conservatives in the debate that this issue is of HUGE concern to them and their grouse-shooting mates. We look forward to hearing the Government’s announcement on those proposals in the near future.
John Lamont MP (Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk) first introduced and then concluded the debate, saying in reference to the petition’s 104,000 signatories, “I suspect those people will be a little surprised by the lack of balance in this debate.”
Was Wild Justice surprised at this lack of balance? No, not at all. But motivated? Absolutely. We will of course not be giving up when it comes to the fight to end this environmentally damaging and unjust so-called ‘sport’, mired in wildlife crime and savage animal cruelty.
Onwards and upwards!
ENDS
I must confess that I pretty much zoned out during the ‘debate’, such was the predictability of the propaganda/speeches from the pro-grouse shooting MPs. I was mostly interested in what DEFRA Minister Daniel Zeichner would have to say at the end of the debate. Whilst waiting for him to speak, though, my ears did prick up at the specific mention of some infamous grouse moor areas.
We had Kevin Hollinrake MP (Conservative, Thirsk & Malton) say this:
“I have beautiful moorland, including in Hawnby, Bransdale, Farndale, Snilesworth and Bilsdale—I am very proud of those areas and have visited a number of times“.
The grouse moors of the North York Moors National Park have long been identified as a raptor persecution hotspot, and North Yorkshire as a whole is repeatedly recognised as the worst county in the UK for reported raptor persecution crimes. Not much to be proud of there, Mr Hollinrake.
Sam Rushworth MP (Labour, Bishop Auckland), whose constituency includes some notorious grouse moors in the North Pennines, which is another well-known raptor persecution hotspot, spoke about attending a recent ‘Lets Learn Moor’ event with primary-age schoolchildren. He also mentioned being “disgusted by the criminality that sometimes occurs on the moorland“. I wonder if he realises that these events, funded by BASC, are facilitated by the Regional Moorland Groups, many of whose members have been under police investigation into suspected and confirmed raptor persecution crimes? Awkward. [Ed: Update 3 July 2025 – Pro-grouse shooting Labour MP Sam Rushworth received £10,000 donation from local grouse moor gamekeeper group – here].
And then there was Jim Shannon MP (DUP, Strangford, NI), a fully-signed up member of the Countryside Alliance, BASC and the Ulster Farmers Union, who treated us to this:
“I want to mention the Glenwherry shoot, which is the only grouse shoot in Northern Ireland. It is sponsored by BASC and the landowner. It is a success, but why is that? To start with, Glenwherry had no more than about 10 grouse, but it built that up. As others have said, the magpies, the crows, the greybacks, the foxes and the rats —all the predators—were controlled. It was gamekeepered, and the heath and moorland was burnt in a controlled burning, so that it could regenerate and produce the heather for the young birds and the grouse. Today, that is a successful grouse shoot. Why is it successful? Because grouse shooters know how to do it. They know how to deliver a successful grouse shoot. The lapwings and curlews also gathered momentum as a result. They have a place to breed every year because of the efforts of the gamekeeper and the landowner—the efforts of those who put money into the grouse shooting to make it a success“.
Would that be the same Glenwherry grouse moor shoot where two illegally poisoned White-tailed Eagles were found dead, side by side, in May 2023? Strange that Mr Shannon forgot to mention them.
Two illegally poisoned White-tailed Eagles found dead on Glenwherry, Northern Ireland’s only driven grouse moor. Photo by Northern Ireland Raptor Study Group.
Hen Harriers were mentioned throughout the debate but it was Minister Zeichner’s reference to the Hen Harrier Taskforce, “…which is using technology such as drones and strategic partnerships to detect, deter and disrupt offenders and is targeting hotspot areas and suspected hen harrier persecution” that caught my attention.
Zeichner claimed that, “Early signs suggest that it is having a positive impact“.
Really? That’s not my understanding. The HH Taskforce has been withholding details of multiple suspected and confirmed Hen Harrier persecution incidents over the last year. There are probably legitimate reasons to withhold information about the most recent cases as the police investigations are active but some of the other cases date back many months, some of them from over a year ago. It is simply not credible to argue that making an announcement about those cases will affect an investigation at this stage. I suspect there are other, political reasons for withholding those cases from the public and I’ll set out my reasoning in future blogs – there’s too much to include here.
For those who want to watch the recording of the Ban Driven Grouse Shooting debate you can find it here.
For those who want to read/download the debate transcript, it’s here:
NUMBER OF HEN HARRIERS KILLED OR MISSING REACHES NEW HIGH
Over the past five years, record numbers of Hen Harriers have been killed or have gone missing according to a new report from the RSPB.
Most of these incidents have occurred on or near grouse moors in northern England.
The RSPB is calling on the Westminster Government to introduce licensing of grouse shooting in England as has happened in Scotland to act as a meaningful deterrent to wildlife crime.
One of the rarest birds in the UK – the Hen Harrier – has seen record numbers being illegally killed or going missing in suspicious circumstances over the past five years.
An illegally killed Hen Harrier. Photo: Ruth Tingay
A new RSPB report – Hen Harriers in the firing line – shows that the majority of the 102 incidents occurred on or near grouse moors. Hen Harriers breed in the uplands of Britain and this is where they come into conflict with grouse shooting.
Hen Harriers are a rare, protected species, known for their acrobatic ‘skydancing’ courtship display over the uplands. The Hen Harrier is categorised as a red-listed species in the UK, due to its low breeding population levels, following historic declines as a result of human persecution.
Despite several conservation initiatives over the past twenty-five years, the Hen Harrier is now the most persecuted bird of prey in the UK for its population size.
The UK population increased between 2016 and 2023, however, 2023 was the worst recorded year for persecution. Hen Harriers remain far less abundant or widespread than they should be, and the current UK population estimate represents only a quarter of the potential population their ideal habitat can support, and in England it is less, about 10%.
Despite being legally protected, multiple studies and reports confirm that criminal activity is the main factor limiting the recovery of Hen Harrier in the UK, causing a reduction in nesting success, annual productivity, and survival of breeding birds. Despite decades of persecution no one in England has ever been convicted of an offence. Most of these crimes take place in remote areas where such activity is hard to detect and a criminal burden of proof against the perpetrators near impossible to secure.
Dr James Robinson the RSPB’s director of operations said “The last five years have seen a record number of illegally killed or disappearing Hen Harriers with 102 suspected or confirmed incidents, the majority happening on or close to grouse moors. This species will not recover until the criminal activity stops, and for this to happen we need regulation of the grouse shooting industry, specifically, the introduction of a licencing system for shoots in England, so estates proven by the Police and Natural England to be linked to raptor persecution would simply lose their licence to operate.”
Another recent study which investigated the illegal killing of Hen Harriers in association with gamebird management showed that the survival rates of Hen Harriers in the UK are “unusually low” with birds surviving for an average of just 121 days after leaving the nest, and persecution accounting for 27-41% of deaths of Hen Harriers aged under one year and 75% of deaths in birds aged between one and two years. It also highlighted a strong overlap between Hen Harrier mortality and the extent of grouse moors.
This new report contains the details of Hen Harriers being shot, their chicks being stamped on and one bird having its head pulled off whilst still alive. This alongside 112 satellite-tagged birds disappearing on or near grouse moors between 2010 and 2024 has led the RSPB to yet again call on the government to regulate the industry and licence grouse moors, as is now law in Scotland.
The Wildlife Management and Muirburn Act, passed in March 2024, means all grouse shoots in Scotland require a licence to operate, and this licence could be revoked if evidence suggests a crime has been committed. Licensing is based on evidence to a civil burden of proof, meaning that it is easier to take action when persecution has taken place. This progressive legislation will help ensure legal and sustainable management across a significant area of upland Scotland and introduces a much-needed deterrent for those who kill birds of prey for economic reasons. But England now lags behind.
This report comes ahead of a parliamentary debate at Westminster Hall on Monday 30 June on the future of Grouse Shooting, triggered by petition launched by the campaign group Wild Justice. Over 100,000 people signed their petition calling for a ban on driven grouse shooting, as they, like the RSPB, want to see an end to the illegal killing of birds of prey and other harmful practices associated with the grouse shooting industry. Action on this issue by Government in England is long overdue, and we will be expecting to hear how the Government intends to end the killing, before it is too late for England’s Hen Harriers.
The RSPB is to be congratulated for putting this report together. A lot of the information contained within it is already well-known, but this report brings it all together in one place. What is new is the hotspot mapping of satellite-tagged Hen Harriers (both RSPB-tagged birds and Natural England tagged birds), and although the detail is coarse, the overall distribution pattern is clear, showing the main hotspots in areas where the land is intensively managed for driven grouse shooting.
The timing of this publication is also very helpful, given the forthcoming Westminster debate on Wild Justice’s latest petition calling for a ban on driven grouse shooting, which takes place next Monday (30 June 2025).
It’s clear from both the press release and the report that the RSPB prefers a licensing approach to regulate driven grouse shooting, rather than a ban. There will be many who disagree with that stance, me included, although I wouldn’t object if Labour committed to bringing in a licensing scheme because it’s better than doing nothing at all and will take us one step closer to getting a ban when the licensing scheme inevitably fails. But now is not the time to argue about that.
The bigger picture here is that the Labour government, and MPs from other parties, have an opportunity to put on record what they think about the scale of the criminal raptor persecution that continues on many driven grouse moors.
The ongoing illegal persecution of raptors is the most difficult of all the issues associated with driven grouse shooting for the shooting industry to defend. It’s a crime, it’s abhorrent, the public hates it, and the evidence showing the extent of it just keeps piling up.
The shooting industry has no defence for it so instead it has resorted to a long-running campaign of smearing those of us who have brought the persecution issue to the public’s attention, in a desperate attempt to discredit our reputations and integrity.
In the run up to this latest Westminster debate, several shooting organisations have tried to play down the significance of another debate on this issue and have argued that this latest debate is pointless and that MPs have more important things to be discussing and there’s ‘no threat here to grouse shooting’. It’s telling though, the amount of pro-grouse shooting propaganda those same organisations have been frenziedly pumping out in recent weeks – it reveals that they are indeed concerned that the public spotlight will once again be on their criminal and environmentally damaging activities.
It’s also been revealing to watch the different organisations contradictorily falling over themselves in a bid to impress their members, by each claiming to be ‘leading the charge/fight’ against us pesky campaigners. For example, on 29 May 2025 the Countryside Alliance ran this headline: ‘Countryside Alliance leads charge against Westminster anti grouse shooting debate‘ and on 10 June 2025 a BASC headline read: ‘BASC leads the fight for driven grouse shooting ahead of debate‘. This level of posturing is a bit of a giveaway as to their level of concern.
This latest report on the illegal killing of Hen Harriers on grouse moors deserves widespread exposure in the run up to the debate so I’d encourage you to email a copy to your MP, ahead of Monday’s debate, and let them know that this issue matters to you and should be of deep concern to them.
I’m not expecting an immediate change of policy to result from Monday’s debate – that would be naive. And I’m fully expecting the usual sneering and snorting from certain members, especially those with a vested interest in maintaining driven grouse shooting, although a lot of those who behaved so appallingly at the first debate nine years ago will no longer be there.
But what I am interested in is listening to those MPs who can demonstrate any modicum of environmental awareness, ecological understanding and intolerance of wildlife crime. It’ll be those MPs, hopefully from across all parties, who we’ll want to work with in the future because we have no intention of dropping our campaign, no matter which party is in Government in the coming years.
Press release from Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI), 25 June 2025:
INVESTIGATION AFTER TESTING CONFIRMS RED KITE POISONED
Police have commenced an investigation after tests confirmed that a red kite which was found dead near Loughbrickland [County Down] had been fatally poisoned.
Testing determined that the legally protected bird of prey bird, which was discovered on land in the Tullymore Road area at the end of December, had died by what’s believed to have been targeted poisoning using the rodenticide Chloralose and the insecticide Bendiocarb.
Superintendent Johnston McDowell, the Police Service lead for Wildlife Crime and Animal Welfare, said: “Red kites, along with all birds of prey, are protected in Northern Ireland under the Wildlife (Northern Ireland) Order 1985, as amended by the Wildlife and Natural Environment (NI) Act 2011.
“These birds were reintroduced to Northern Ireland in 2008 after being extinct here for centuries, and tragically this is not the first time we have had reports of this nature in this same area. Two ravens were also recently found dead having been poisoned using similar chemicals [Ed: see here], and it saddens me that these incredible birds are being intentionally killed.
“Anyone who finds a dead bird of prey such as a red kite which they suspect to have been poisoned, shot or illegally trapped, or anyone with information about the illegal trade in these birds, should contact police and report their concerns. The poisons used in these most recent incidents are deadly not only to birds and wildlife, but also to humans and as such anyone who comes across the body of any of these birds shouldn’t touch them, but alert the authorities instead.
“PSNI along with Northern Ireland Environment Agency conducted a number of enquiries along with a site visit, and utilised the technical and advisory support of the UK’s National Wildlife Crime Unit throughout the time since the discovery of the Red Kite.
“The Police Service also works closely with our colleagues in the Health and Safety Executive and the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development to identify poisons being used and where a crime is found to have been committed, we will take steps to identify and prosecute offenders. Those found guilty of persecution of protected birds of prey can face a custodial sentence and/or fines of up to £5,000 per offence.”
The Health and Safety Executive NI, one of the enforcing authorities responsible for Biocidal Product Regulations in Northern Ireland, said: “HSENI, who is one of the enforcing authorities responsible for Biocidal Product Regulations in Northern Ireland said: “Where duty-holders are found to have incorrectly used or have misused biocidal products or continue to use or store biocidal products that have been withdrawn from the market, HSENI will take appropriate enforcement action to achieve compliance. This highlights the importance of responsible use of all chemicals including biocidal products.”
A spokesperson for the Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs said: “The intentional poisoning wildlife and birds is abhorrent. Supplying, storing (being in possession of) or using a Plant Protection Product (PPP), that has been banned, is an offence. It is also an offence to use an authorised PPP in contravention of the conditions and the specific restrictions established by the authorisation and specified on the product label. If convicted of committing an offence, fines will incur.”
Superintendent McDowell added: “Our Operation Raptor – Peregrine Watch, is an initiative between the PAW Bird of Prey Sub Group and our Air Support Unit, working alongside local police officers, which uses drones to monitor and protect the nesting sites of birds of prey, and is a direct result of birds being targeted, just like in this case, with very serious and dangerous substances in a number of areas across Northern Ireland.
“Along with our partners we will continue to investigate wildlife crime and seek to prevent further instances, whilst bringing offenders to justice.”
Please report wildlife crime by calling 101. A report can also be made online via http://www.psni.police.uk/makeareport/ or you can also contact Crimestoppers anonymously on 0800 555 111 or online at http://crimestoppers-uk.org/. If you have any information on this particular incident please quote incident number 419 24/12/24.
ENDS
Earlier this month representatives from the NI Raptor Study Group, Ulster Wildlife and the RSPB handed in a 50,000-signature petition to Environment Minister Andrew Muir, calling for a ban on the possession of dangerous, raptor-killing poisons (here).
It’s not yet clear what the Minister intends to do, if anything.
If you’re a NI resident and you’re reading this, please consider contacting your local politician and ask them to raise the issue at Stormont – all the Minister has to do is write a list of proscribed poisons and get it added to section 15B of the Wildlife (Northern Ireland) Order 1985. It really should be very simple.
The most recent summary report of raptor persecution in Northern Ireland (2021-2022, published last year by the NI Partnership for Action Against Wildlife Crime), shows that illegal poisoning is the most commonly used method of persecution in the country. The report can be read/downloaded here:
In March 2024, the Scottish Parliament voted for the Wildlife Management and Muirburn (Scotland) Bill, which introduced, amongst other things, a requirement for all muirburn to be licensed (see here).
The Bill was enacted in May 2024 and became the Wildlife Management & Muirburn (Scotland) Act 2024 and since then we’ve seen the introduction of a grouse moor licensing scheme (although this still remains contentious as the licence has been significantly weakened after lobbying by the grouse shooting industry – an update on that is coming shortly) and the banning of the use of snares.
The introduction of the muirburn licence, also contentious because many conservationists didn’t believe it went far enough (e.g. see here), was due to be in place for the start of the 2025/26 muirburn season on 15 September 2025, some 18 months after the Scottish Parliament voted in favour of it.
Deliberately setting fire to vegetation on peatland carbon stores, to facilitate an artificially high number of Red Grouse for shooting, is both obscene and absurd. Photo by Ruth Tingay
NatureScot has held a series of stakeholder meetings over a period of several months to discuss the requirements of the new muirburn licence, including a revised Muirburn Code (justifiably criticised by Nick Kempe, the author of the Parkswatchscotland blog – e.g. see here, here and here) and NatureScot also ran a consultation on the new draft Muirburn Code (the consultation closed on 5 May 2025). NatureScot is currently reviewing the responses to that consultation. Here is a copy of the consultation document detailing the draft new Muirburn Code for those interested:
NatureScot has also produced an interactive map to help identify areas of what has been described in the Act as ‘peatland’ (areas of +40cm peat depth), ‘non-peatland’ and ‘uncertain peatland’ (areas that contain peat but the depth is currently unknown). Those who want to carry out muirburn will need to know the depth of the peat in the areas they wish to burn because licences will only be issued for certain purposes, depending on peat depth:
All the preparations seemed on track for the introduction of the licence before 15 September 2025 but then last week, the Scottish Government and NatureScot caved in to intensive political lobbying by the grouse shooting industry and agreed to delay the start of muirburn licensing until 1 January 2026.
The grouse shooting industry had argued that it wasn’t practical or fair to introduce the licence by 15 September because, according to BASC:
‘Proceeding with muirburn licensing in its current form would have risked confusion, undermined public trust and jeopardised effective upland management‘,
and
‘Introducing a licensing system without clear guidance, stakeholder consensus or adequate preparation would have been deeply irresponsible‘.
This wasn’t just the view of BASC – other lobbyists included the usual suspects such as Scottish Land & Estates, NFU Scotland and the Scottish Gamekeepers Association.
Had the new licence conditions been foisted on these groups with genuinely short notice I might have had some sympathy with their arguments, but given that the Act has already been on the statute books for 13 months, with another three months to go before the intended start date of the muirburn licence, I’d argue that they’ve had more than adequate time to prepare.
I can’t help but compare NatureScot’s decision to delay implementation with its recent decision to impose a new licence condition on raptor fieldworkers monitoring Schedule 1 raptors (whereby licence holders are now required to provide advanced notification to land owners of Schedule 1 monitoring visits). NatureScot imposed this new licence condition without providing adequate preparation time, without providing clear guidance, and without stakeholder consensus.
The Scottish Raptor Study Group made an entirely reasonable case to delay implementation until the 2026 monitoring season to allow its volunteer fieldworkers time to prepare but NatureScot outright refused to do this, and as far as I’m aware, didn’t provide a cogent rationale for its pig-headedness. Senior officials simply kept repeating the mantra that NatureScot had the power to impose whatever licence conditions it liked, without prior consultation.
I haven’t written about that fiasco in detail yet, for a number of reasons, but I’ll get to it soon. There’s a little bit about it here, and it sits within a wider and growing dissatisfaction amongst conservationists towards the decision-making processes in NatureScot’s wildlife management department. Its decision to delay the introduction of muirburn licensing at the behest of the grouse shooting lobby will only add fuel to the fire (pun intended).
I’m not sure whether the delay in implementing the licence will mean that muirburning can still begin on 15 September (the new opening date of the muirburn season according to the Act) or whether the old start date of 1 October will still apply given that licences will not be in place.
Either way, from 15 Sept or 1 Oct 2025, up until 31 December 2025, I’m certain we can expect to see extensive and intensive fires across Scotland’s grouse moors as gamekeepers take full advantage of the opportunity to burn on large areas of deep peat before the restrictions come in on 1 January 2026.
UPDATE 8 July 2025: Intensive grouse moor management ahead of muirburn licensing in Scotland (here)
UPDATE 9 October 2025: Scottish Government delays start of muirburn licences (for second time) after aggressive lobbying by grouse shooting industry (here)
UPDATE 30 October 2025: Scottish Govt fiddles while grouse moors burn (here)
Earlier this month I blogged about an EIR request I’d submitted to Natural England in April, asking for a copy of the second social science report that NE had commissioned as part of its review of the 7-year Hen Harrier brood meddling trial (see here).
It took Natural England 20 working days to respond and tell me that an extension of another 20 working days was required, “because of the complexity/voluminous nature of the request“.
That was complete nonsense, of course. It was a simple, straightforward request asking for a copy of a report that had been written a year ago and had already been used by Natural England in its decision to close the brood meddling ‘trial’ (sham), announced in March 2025 (here).
For new blog readers, the hen harrier brood meddling trial was a conservation sham sanctioned by DEFRA as part of its ludicrous ‘Hen Harrier Action Plan‘ and carried out by Natural England between 2018 – 2024, in cahoots with the very industry responsible for the species’ catastrophic decline in England. In general terms, the plan involved the removal of hen harrier chicks from grouse moors, they were reared in captivity, then released back into the uplands just in time for the start of the grouse-shooting season where many were illegally killed. It was plainly bonkers. For more background see here and here.
Natural England has now written again and has refused to release the social science report:
“This report is in final draft stage. Natural England are finalising this report and are progressing with the process of internal review required for publication. We cannot give an exact publication date due to uncertainties inherent in this internal review and publication process. This report is therefore being withheld under Reg 12(4)(d) – course of completion“.
So the excuse given this time is not because my request was ‘complex’ or ‘voluminous’ (because it wasn’t), but because the report is apparently still in draft status.
Even though it was written a year ago and the findings were referred to in Natural England’s March 2025 announcement on the future of hen harrier brood meddling.
Same old lack of transparency from Natural England, then. It’s almost as though there’s something to hide (apart from the corpses of illegally killed Hen Harriers).
Around 40 local residents from Sheffield and North Derbyshire have started a campaign to bring local grouse moors in to community ownership.
The group ‘Reclaim Our Moors‘ held its inaugural meeting on 7 June 2025 where campaigners offered the Duke of Rutland £1 to buy Moscar Moor ‘as it is in such a sad and sorry state’.
Photo by Reclaim Our Moors
The group, which includes a number of local councillors, ecologists and campaigner Bob Berzins amongst its membership, was joined by land reform author and campaigner Guy Shrubsole for a visit to nearby Moscar Estate, a grouse moor that Bob wrote about in his guest blog yesterday – here.
The group argues that the grouse moor has been “trashed” by the duke, “who sets it on fire – sending smoke into people’s homes, worsening flood risk downstream and releasing carbon that adds to the climate crisis” and that it has been “scoured of wildlife by gamekeepers who kill anything that could affect gamebird numbers”, according to an article published yesterday by local newspaper The Star (see here).
Photo by Reclaim Our Moors
Moscar Moor isn’t for sale but Reclaim Our Moors is assessing opportunities under the government’s forthcoming ‘Community Right to Buy’ legislation (see here).
The group has already had conversations with the local MP, Olivia Blake, and is taking an interest in the forthcoming Westminster Hall debate on Wild Justice’s 100,000+ signature petition calling for a ban on driven grouse shooting.
I hope Olivia attends the debate and uses the opportunity to highlight the strength of feeling amongst her constituents, to counter the inevitable narrative that pro-grouse shooting MPs will undoubtedly be making about how driven grouse shooting is supposedly welcomed and embraced by local communities.
Much kudos to Reclaim Our Moors, some of whose members have previously been targeted by the grouse shooting industry’s vile astroturfers, Campaign for the Protection of Moorland Communities (C4PMC), which specialises in making personal attacks and smears on anyone who dares to raise questions about the environmental unsustainability and criminality associated with driven grouse moor management. It takes courage to go up against that level of abuse and intimidation and the creation of Reclaim Our Moors is testament to that courage.
Reclaim Our Moors has a website (here) where you can get in touch and in due course find out more about their campaign and how to support it.
This is a guest blog written by conservation campaigner and author Bob Berzins who has written previously on this blog here, here, here, here, here,hereandhere.
MPs are scheduled to debate the Wild Justice Ban Driven Grouse Shooting petition on 30th June 2025 in Westminster Hall.
The Government response to the petition states, “… well managed shooting activities…can be beneficial for wildlife and habitat conservation”, and, “The Government supports the National Wildlife Crime Unit (NWCU) – which helps prevent and detect crimes against wildlife by obtaining and disseminating intelligence and directly assisting law enforcers in their investigations.” Further, “All forms of predator management to protect grouse must be undertaken within the law, including compliance with animal welfare legislation.”
Fine words, if only they were true.
This site provides comprehensive and ongoing exposure of blatant and deliberate raptor persecution on many driven grouse moors. So I’ll provide an update and recent examples from the Peak District of some of the other factors which support an urgent need for a ban.
Grouse moors receive a lot of taxpayer moneyfor little return
This link (here) shows a data map for environmental stewardship agreements in England. These areas have not made the transition to the new Environmental Land Management Schemes (ELMS) but have their existing 10 year agreements extended. The database indicates that Moscar Estate, owned by the Duke of Rutland in the Peak District National Park, has a scheme from 2012 to 2028 with total subsidy payments calculated at over £2.8 million.
Natural England is responsible for administering these stewardship schemes but rarely checks SSSI unit condition. After paying Moscar Estate (so far) over £2 million since 2012, the condition of two of the SSSI units that were last checked by Natural England in 2022, Black Hole Moor (here) and Derwent Moors (here), are both rated as Unfavourable – No Change.
Here is the NE commentary on the site condition assessment for Black Hole Moor:
Here is the NE commentary on the site condition assessment for Derwent Moors:
From these site assessments, it seems clear to me that driven grouse moor management – which prioritises grouse numbers above all else – does not result in good condition of blanket bog, a priority habitat.
A carcass-filled landscape
The British Association for Shooting and Conservation (BASC) claims that grouse moors are teeming with life. A more accurate description would be: filled with decomposing carcasses.
Canada Geese and assorted dead wildlife photographed on Moscar Estate, spring 2025 (Bob Berzins)
Canada geese can be shot under General Licence GL41 (here) to ‘prevent slips and falls, spread of human disease and issues with birds nesting’. I think it’s obvious to most people that decomposing carcasses just a mile upstream from a Yorkshire Water reservoir are a health hazard but it’s impossible to get the Environment Agency or local authorities to take action on stink pits.
Charred and barren uplands
Evidence of burning on Midhope Moor, spring 2025. (Bob Berzins)
In October 2023, when nearby grouse moors were being deliberately set alight, Sheffield filled with smoke (here), causing air pollution monitors for particulates to spike well above safe levels for several hours. But burning continues (so there can be more grouse to shoot) and when vegetation is removed from steep slopes in particular, water flows increase making flooding more likely. If new concrete barriers protect Sheffield city centre then Doncaster is flooded downstream.
Pharmaceuticals seep into our water
Typical medicated grit station on a Peak District grouse moor, summer 2025. Over-turned turf on blanket bog (Bob Berzins)
There was no grouse shooting that I’m aware of in the Peak District in 2024, and the response from estates was a very obvious increase in burning, mowing, traps and medicated grit. So more intensive management which has obviously failed before. And oh dear, there doesn’t appear to be any grouse this year either.
The quartz grit in the photo is usually laced with Flubendazole – a worming agent to prevent the strongyle parasite and it’s very obvious how this leeches into the water table. And by the way Yorkshire Water won’t test for this chemical. The only reason Flubendazole is used is to produce more grouse to shoot. [Ed: See here for more detail on the medicated grit scandal – exposed ten years ago and still it continues].
Police, National Wildlife Crime Unit (NWCU) and animal welfare
In March 2025, I reported a number of DOC traps (a brand of spring trap) I’d found on another Peak District grouse moor to South Yorkshire Police and I included a request that SYP officers liaise with the National Wildlife Crime Unit (after listening to the NWCU presentation at last autumn’s Northern England Raptor Conference). I was being ‘the eyes and ears’ that NWCU had requested.
I’ve written previously about the inhumaneness of these traps (here) and this photo below shows a Stoat mainly outside the trap with only a small part of the body crushed under the bars – contrary to legal and humane use of these devices.
Trapped Stoat in a DOC trap (Bob Berzins)
Regardless of the trap set-up, Defra informed me that animals were protected from unnecessary suffering because the trap operator has a statutory obligation to remove any animal trapped as a result of a foul strike.
This is a nonsense because there’s no statutory requirement to check these traps and this device, like many others, is in the middle of nowhere miles from any road or track.
A crucial factor in the humaneness of these traps is compliance with the statutory requirements for the set-up. Relevant here is the maximum permitted diameter of the internal baffle (a structure with an aperture/hole that slows down the animal and directs it into the trap) for a ‘run through’ trap (as shown in the above photo) is 51mm and the bottom of the hole/aperture has to be level with the trap plate (see here, p3).
The trap in the photo above has a 50mm mesh tunnel where wire strands have been cut to enlarge the opening and because of the large piles of moss either side of the trap, the internal baffle is several centimetres above the plate. I would say this trap is unlawful and the trap operator should be prosecuted.
Some estates do manage to set compliant traps such as this one below where a smaller gauge mesh is used for the tunnel with the approach on a flat plank of wood level with the trap:
A lawfully-set DOC trap (Bob Berzins)
The South Yorkshire Police Officer dealing with this case assured me they work closely with the NWCU and also said,
“We have a meeting coming up with all the estate managers and I would like to raise these issues at the meeting.”
I replied asking for notes or minutes of the meeting. It’s well known that police, the Peak District National Park Authority, estate managers and gamekeepers meet annually at Chatsworth – a closed door get together with no minutes or published notes. I understand that other meetings have also taken place between police and the Peak District Moorland Group [Ed: one of a number of regional grouse moor gamekeeper groups established in recent years, established and funded by shadowy figures in the grouse shooting industry, with an objective to promote grouse moor shooting and smear/discredit anybody who dares raise questions about sustainability, ethics and criminality. This particular moorland group has strong links to the dodgy astroturfers, C4PMC (Campaign for Protection of Moorland Communities)].
A further visit I made three months on, in June 2025, showed the estate in question still setting traps that I believe to be set unlawfully. And still no proper reply from the police.
Trap photographed in June 2025 (Bob Berzins)
Perhaps the National Wildlife Crime Unit could offer an opinion here – the incident number is SYP-20250321-1026. Or has this case already been wrapped up in a closed door meeting with a friendly handshake and slap on the back?
The Government response to the Wild Justice petition is disingenuous greenwash. So please write to your MP – the simplest way to stop this nonsense is to ban driven grouse shooting.
UPDATE 19 June 2025: ‘Reclaim Our Moors’ – local residents in Sheffield and North Derbyshire start campaign for community ownership of ‘trashed’ grouse moors (here)
Press release from Northern Ireland Raptor Study Group (17 June 2025)
50,000-signature petition, calling for a ban on poison possession, handed into Stormont.
Today (17th June), a petition begun by the Northern Ireland Raptor Study Group (NIRSG), calling for the possession of various toxic pesticides to be made illegal, was handed in to officials at Stormont by representatives of the Group, alongside staff from RSPB NI and Ulster Wildlife.
The eagles died after consuming a bait laced with Bendiocarb, a chemical prohibited from outdoor use in Northern Ireland, and were the latest victims in a series of poisoning incidents here that has claimed the lives of over 60 protected birds of prey in recent years.
The two poisoned White-tailed Eagles found dead on a grouse moor in May 2023. Photo by Northern Ireland Raptor Study Group
NIRSG’s raptor officer, Dr. Eimear Rooney said: “The day we recovered the bodies of those two eagles from the hillside at Glenwherry was one of the most upsetting of my career working with Northern Ireland’s raptors. White-tailed Eagles are only just making a return to our skies after being made extinct on the island of Ireland by past human actions over 100 years ago. But it’s not just eagles that fall victim to the criminals illegally using these poisons – it’s Red Kites, Buzzards and Peregrine Falcons as well as people’s pet cats and dogs.”
Dawn Miskelly, Ulster Wildlife CEO, said “Poisons have devastating impacts on raptor populations. Protecting these birds from poisoning is not just about conserving individual species – it’s about safeguarding and preserving biodiversity for future generations. We urgently call on the Assembly to recognise the significant public concern around this issue and act by resolving to create legislation to make the possession of these toxic pesticides illegal.”
Ian Thomson, RSPB’s Investigations Manager added “Similar legislation in Scotland has led to the successful prosecution of a sizeable number of individuals linked to the illegal poisoning of wildlife. There is no legal reason to hold onto these chemicals, long banned from use, but we repeatedly see Northern Ireland’s birds of prey fall victim to these same substances. Making their possession illegal here will make identifying the perpetrators of these crimes more straightforward, will hopefully create a significant deterrent to the illegal use of poison, and most importantly, will help protect wildlife, domestic pets and people from harm.”
Dr Marc Ruddock, also from NIRSG, continued: “The Wildlife Order already includes legislation banning the possession of pesticides containing a proscribed ingredient, but, in the 14 years since that legislation was passed, lawmakers have never produced the required list of proscribed ingredients. This means that highly toxic poisons such as carbofuran and aldicarb, banned from legal use, are being stored and utilised by those wishing to do harm to our wildlife. It is clear that the intention of the legislature, in passing these laws back in 2011, was for the possession of these awful chemicals to be a crime, but the final step to do so was never completed. It needs to be done, now, with no further delays and recognise the public’s considerable concerns and acts quickly to create a pathway to finally resolve this issue.”
The organisations that attended today at Stormont are all members of the Partnership for Action Against Wildlife Crime and previously met with DAERA officials. They were also able to discuss their concerns with Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs, Andrew Muir MLA, yesterday.
Dr. Rooney added “Our meeting with the Minster was welcome and constructive, and he acknowledged that the poisoning of our birds of prey is deeply concerning. We are grateful to Minister Muir for meeting us today at Stormont and receiving the petition.”
ENDS
First of all, many thanks to all of you who signed this petition, which reached 50,000 signatures in March this year (see here).
Secondly, well done to the Northern Ireland Raptor Study Group for curating this campaign, supported by the RSPB and Ulster Wildlife. The illegal poisoning of those two White-tailed Eagles, found on Northern Ireland’s only driven grouse moor in May 2023, was both shocking, and yet not shocking. It’s a sad reflection of what we’ve come to expect on many driven grouse moors across the UK.
The groups did well to secure a meeting with Minister Andrew Muir, but it’s surprising to see it described as “constructive”. What does that mean? The Minister was presented with a petition of 50,000 signatures calling for a ban on the possession of these lethal, unlawful chemicals, and he said what, exactly?
‘Oh yeah, thanks, it’s awful isn’t it, let me think about what we can do about it‘?
The remedy is simple, and obvious. Write the list of proscribed poisons and get it added to section 15B of the Wildlife (Northern Ireland) Order 1985.
It’s not that difficult!
UPDATE 25 June 2025: Police launch investigation after Red Kite killed in poisoning hotspot (here)
UPDATE 6 July 2025: Northern Ireland Minister commits to taking action on illegal poisoning of birds of prey (here)
You will remember that we asked you to sign our most recent petition to ban driven grouse shooting and over 100,000 of you did so – thank you!
Thanks to your tremendous response, this issue is once again the subject of a parliamentary debate at Westminster Hall on Monday 30 June 2025, starting at 4.30pm. This will be the third time a petition calling for a ban has passed 100,000 signatures (we’re a tenacious bunch!) but it’ll be the first debate under a Labour government and is therefore an opportunity for Labour to show its environmental credentials at a time when public interest and environmental concern is high.
When Labour was in opposition, it indicated that it would consider licensing grouse shooting because it agreed that the continuation of widespread wildlife crime and environmental destruction (such as burning heather in areas of deep peat) associated with driven grouse moor management was unacceptable. However, in its woeful response to our petition at 10,000 signatures, Labour pretended that these issues are under control instead of acknowledging that current regulation is barely monitored and often weakly enforced. Labour concluded that it had no plans to change anything, either through licensing or a ban.
If this is genuinely Labour’s current stance and it believes that driven grouse shooting is good for wildlife, the environment and people, then it needs to explain to voters:
Why the illegal shooting, trapping and poisoning of birds of prey such as Hen Harriers, Red Kites, Buzzards, Peregrines etc continues on grouse moors even though it’s been illegal for 71 years;
Why it thinks the continued burning of heather moorland, particularly in protected areas like blanket bogs, is acceptable in a climate emergency;
Why it thinks the mass medication of a supposedly ‘wild’ bird (Red Grouse) with a toxic chemical (Flubendazole) is acceptable when ecotoxicology studies have identified this as an emerging environmental contaminant of acute and chronic toxicity;
Why it thinks that the continued use of grit trays (to distribute the drug Flubendazole) is acceptable when this is known to have contributed to the rapid spread of disease (respiratory cryptosporidiosis) on many grouse moors which not only poses welfare concerns but is also a significant threat to biodiversity, especially other avian species of high conservation concern;
Why it thinks its acceptable to legally kill up to a quarter of a million animals each year in traps and snares, just to ensure that artificially-high numbers of Red Grouse are available for shooting;
Why it thinks it’s morally acceptable or ethical to trap wild birds, particularly crows and other corvids, and subject them to sudden confinement, fear and possible aggression, along with the discomfort of exposure, before finally being ineptly beaten to death;
These are just a few examples of an increasingly large list of concerns about driven grouse shooting. In recent years a number of rural communities that live within areas intensively managed for driven grouse shooting (e.g. Yorkshire Dales National Park, Calderdale, North York Moors National Park, Peak District National Park) have been raising their objections to what is happening to their local environment, particularly the ongoing illegal persecution of birds of prey, the increased risk of flooding, the industrial-scale legal killing of native wildlife, and the effect on public health from harmful smoke and particles from the burning of the grouse moors.
Labour has so far dodged providing any justification for its support of this outdated Edwardian hangover other than saying that “well-managed shooting activities can bring benefits to the rural economy and can be beneficial for wildlife and habitat conservation”. The whole point is that driven grouse shooting isn’t “well managed” at all – it’s largely unregulated and out of control – and is known to have high animal welfare, environmental and social costs.
Invite your MP to attend the debate
The forthcoming Westminster debate provides the perfect opportunity for Labour to stand up, on record, and tell us why it supports the status quo. It also gives MPs who do want to see driven grouse shooting come to an end an opportunity to make their views heard.
Some of you have already been writing to your MPs ahead of the debate and have shared with us the responses you’ve received (thank you). But we’d like more of you to do this because (a) it’s important that your MP understands that this issue matters to constituents, and (b) MPs who are interested in environmental and animal welfare issues attend the debate and add to the conversation.
Please write to your MP, sharing your concerns about driven grouse shooting, and asking them to attend the debate on June 30th.
We won’t provide you with a template letter/email because we believe that many MPs simply ignore mass mail outs. Instead, we urge you to compose your own, using the six points above as a general outline and/or adding your own personal thoughts. It is worth emphasising to your MP that you are well informed about this issue and that you’ll be watching the debate with interest to see whether they attend, and if so, whether they provide a fair representation of your views.
If you’re not sure who your MP is, you can use this easy online tool to find their contact details.
We mentioned recently that our CEO, Bob Elliot, was interviewed recently by the League Against Cruel Sports talking about our ban driven grouse shooting campaign. It’s a useful reminder of the issues, have a listen here.
Thank you for helping us secure another Westminster debate on this issue and for helping to ensure that a large number of MPs understand its importance to constituency members. Together, we can stand up for wildlife and urge the restoration of our uplands for nature, climate and people.
Raptor Persecution UK 